@BeCurieus's Threads

For clarity, total gamma dose levels are not actually that high, you can find places on earth with significantly higher dose levels that aren't evacuations zones. 2 isotopes, however, are in excess compared to most other places on earth. Specifically Pu239-240.

This is because Chernobyl and Fukushima spread their contamination by lower energetic means, notably a meltdown/fire/conventional explosions. This means it is harder to transport high mass atoms. Low mass atoms, however, still get enough juice kicked into them to be transported.

A bomb, however, is not only mostly plutonium and highly enriched uranium. But it also has a lot more explosive force to transport materials. This means more heavy isotope contamination over a wider area. That is a complicated mess, I know.

Ok, so #ChernobylHBO is over. Let's talk reactor kinematics! This will be a summary of the INSAG report, the most authoritative work on the matter.

So, let us start with the beginning. #Chernobyl is unlike many reactors. It uses both graphite AND water.

In a nuclear reactor, we need neutrons to cause a chain reaction. When born from fission, neutrons are going way to fast for low enriched uranium to handle. We have to slow them down. This is done with water for most modern reactors, but sometimes also graphite.

The first reactors ever made used graphite because it is easy to pile up. It isn't easy, however, to extract heat from this system. This is where the water comes in. Water in most reactors is used both to slow down neutrons AND remove heat from the system.

Sometimes people like to mock CCS being dubbed "clean coal" because there isn't such a thing as clean coal in terms of its entire environmental footprint, as this article points out. Still,CCS likely needed but should tone down the clean coal talking point utilitydive.com/news/virtually…

While fossil fuels exist, any that do should have to sequester their emissions. But that will never make the damage they do in other areas clean and fossil fuels likely will never be held to account to the degree we have held other systems...*cough cough like nuclear cough*

Seriously, the only reason we internalized nuclear costs is because it is actually an achievable thing. When fossil fuels have to give a true accounting of their costs, no one would build them given the current alternatives.

After the amount it has decayed, it is likely at about 2 Sv/hr....that is still very intense. Very easy to obtain a lethal dose in either case.

About 2 Sv rapidly is when we expect a relatively high chance of mortality without treatment, and about 4 Sv is where we expect relatively high mortality even with treatment. 8 Sv is about certain you will die no mater what.